JUDGMENTBY: MOHAMED DZAIDDIN FCJ (DELIVERING THE JUDGMENT OF THE COURT)

MOHAMED DZAIDDIN FCJ (DELIVERING THE JUDGMENT OF THE COURT) The appellant was charged in the High Court, Kangar, for trafficking in a dangerous drug, to wit, cannabis, weighing 1,302.9g at about 12 noon at 30km Jalan Kangar, Padang Besar, Perlis, on 2 March 1989 under s 39B(1)(a) and punishable under s 39B(2) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 (the Act). He was convicted and sentenced to death.

Before us, the sole ground of appeal that was argued was that the learned judge erred in law in not holding that the evidence of the chemist, PW1, was insufficient, inadequate, doubtful and ambiguous to prove that the drug was cannabis as defined in the Act. It was the submission of Encik Gurbachan that the chemist, in his evidence, failed to testify that the impugned drug was cannabis as defined under s 2 of the Act, contrary to the decision of this court in Shukri bin Mohamad v PP [1995] 3 MLJ 229 . Hence, counsel submitted that following Shukri, the conviction of the appellant under s 39B(1)(a) of the Act should be quashed and the sentence of death be set aside, and substituted with a conviction under s 12(2) of th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document